That really is a keeper. I’ll be re-reading it more than once. I am only passingly familiar with Heidegger’s philosophizing.

As I see it, justice (i.e. an ethic for governing the governance of human beings as well as the ubiquitous social processes that we create as a matter of our existence — a political process and an economy) is an inherently inter-subjective matter. It therefore forces both the ontological issue of the existence of other beings like oneself within a shared material existence and the epistemological issue of whether/how there can be any ethic, i.e. any rule to govern interactions among those beings, that all such beings must accept.

For such an ethic to be intrinsically intersubjectively valid it would have to avoid making even one assertion that cannot be substantiated within that shared material existence. People can accept or not any assertion that cannot be validated within that material existence, but only assertions that can be validated within that material existence can be necessarily applicable to all human beings sharing that existence.

For whatever reason, it seems that no one wants to acknowledge that I have successfully developed an ethic that resolves all of those issues. It applies to anyone who perceives that one is a ‘human being’ experiencing a material existence that includes other human beings and that all such beings have no choice but to effect choices (which I got from Warren J. Samuels). To respect others’ given, necessary capacity to choose for themselves (beginning with whether/how/to what extent to be involved in any way — as means or ends, directly or indirectly, purposefully or not — whenever any choice is being effected) is to recognize them as fellow human beings within that material existence. To act otherwise is to assert some status regarding ‘thee and thou’ that cannot be substantiated within that material existence. So the ethic of justice for ‘human beings’ (as we call ourselves) must be mutual respect in effecting choices. [A fuller but still brief (“5 min read”) summation is here in Medium.]

I do not say that knowledge of this ethic creates a Utopia. I do say that knowledge of it is a quantum leap for justice.

In short, beliefs divide people. Our rational capacity (which I happen to believe was given us, one way or another, by the Lord), which we use to cope with our material existence, is our only given intersubjective commonality.

This idea needs advocates. The world needs for this idea to have advocates — unless there is a more impelling account of justice of which I am unaware.